Fact-sheet 30 - Regional - 8071-00/2005 2579-00/2009 8071-01/2012
6.6
Which risks for the achievement of outcomes were formulated?
Project documents
and (xi)
6.7
Is the intervention exemplary/ a model for other interventions,
does it form structures and can it be up‐scaled?
7.
Assessment of the impact in general
Sources
7.1
Which is the most important positive impact of the intervention?
Project documents
Phase 1‐3 and (xi)
7.2
Which is the most important negative impact of the intervention?
8.
Assessment of the impact in relation to the key environmental
criteria
Assessme‐nt
1‐7[1]
Sources
8.1
How, and to what extent, did the intervention (positively and
negatively) plausibly contribute to changes in the key criteria
ʺenvironmental protectionʺ, and which external factors
contributed to these changes?
4 (xi) p. 22 and
interviews
8.2
How, and to what extent, did the intervention (positively and
negatively) plausibly contribute to changes in the key criteria for
“sustainable management of natural resources”, and which
external factors contributed to these changes?
6 (xi) 21 and interviews
8.3
… ʺreduce conflicts about the use of resourcesʺ
8.4
… ʺimprovement of standard of livingʺ
8.5
… ʺimproved access to energy and resourcesʺ
8.6
… ʺcontribution to climate change adaptation and mitigationʺ
8.7
… ʺstrengthening of governmental institutions and civil societyʺ
5 Interviews
Only given for Phase 3:
Component 1:
‐ Lack of cooperation by stakeholders.
‐ Carrying out activities with limited value added to what has already been done in the beneficiary region.
‐ Lack of effective coordination and interaction with on‐going activities related to the subject matter of the contract, resulting in overlaps, confusion and
wasting of valuable resources.
‐ Insufficient ministerial capacity to assimilate assistance and cooperate at the regional level.
‐ Lack of relevant staff with good English skills.
‐ Weaknesses in communication with some of the beneficiary countries’ administrations.
‐ Corruption affecting target groups and target sectors.
Component 2:
Signature of the Dniester Treaty as a precondition for the creation of permanent institutions for river basin management and climate change adaptation.
Evaluation identifies the additional risk of low priority of environmental issues in SEE countries, with the prospect of EU pre‐accession funds causing
reduced interest among bilateral donors in investment.
From Albania a very positive example is reported, where stakeholders from environmental NGOs were involved in the development of a formal cooperation
mechanism among the riparian countries of the Drin basin. In a public hearing organised by a Parliamentary Commission, the NGOs were invited to express
their views on the topic, which was the first time that NGOs had been allowed to speak in the Albanian Parliament.
The ENVSEC initiative led to concrete investment in remediation and cleanup activities in different mining sites, e.g. investment in rehabilitation of tailing
dams and acid mine drainage, which significantly reduced local and regional environmental and human health risks.
Explanation
Explanation
Through the improvement of tailing dams, pollution control and mitigation of acid mine waters to deal with real environmental and security threats arising
from the mining sector, the environmental situation has improved significantly. This is very visible in the example of the Kosovo mining facilities in
Mitrovica, and Trepca, although in Mitrovica, the tailing dam could unfortunately be only partially rehabilitated.
Nature conservation and transboundary park establishment are considered to be successful paths towards establishing dialogue in post conflict societies.
ENVSEC contributed to the establishment of nature transboundary parks in Albania, Montenegro and Kosovo. Activities which supported the establishment
of protected areas in the Sar Mountains of Macedonia supported by UNEP were not as effective, due to expressed opposing development interests. An
agreement between Kosovo and Macedonia on joint management of the River Lepenec could be established between the two governments.
Page 11
Fact-sheet 30 - Regional - 8071-00/2005 2579-00/2009 8071-01/2012
8.8
… ʺimproved possibility to implement multilateral
environmental agreementsʺ
8.9
… ʺothersʺ
9.
Assessment of the impact in relation to the thematic
operational fields for environment and development
Assessme‐nt
1‐7[1]
Sources
9.1
Sustainable natural resource management and preserving
biodiversity
Assessme‐nt
1‐7[1]
Sources
9.1.1
How, and to what extent, did the intervention (positively and
negatively) plausibly contribute to changes regarding the key
criteria ʺpropagating ecologically appropriate, diversified
agriculture and promoting organic farmingʺ? Which external
factors contributed to these changes?
9.1.2
… ʺadvocating precaution in the use of genetically modified
organismsʺ
9.1.3
… ʺcontributing to secure land and use rights and to sustainable
long‐term land‐use planningʺ
9.1.4
… ʺsecuring protected areas and promoting innovative incentives
for resource conservationʺ
4 (viii) p. 61‐77 and
interviews
9.1.5
… ʺsupporting sustainable forest and timber managementʺ
9.1.6
… ʺenhance the environmental awareness of the populationʺ
4 (viii) p. 78 and
interviews
9.1.7
… ʺdevelop sustainable tourism conceptsʺ
9.1.8
… ʺdevelop sustainable tourism management conceptsʺ
9.1.9
… ʺrisks and potentialsʺ
9.2
Sustainable chemicals and waste management B112
Assessme‐nt
1‐7[1]
Sources
9.2.1
How, and to what extent, did the intervention (positively and
negatively) plausibly contribute to changes regarding the key
criteria ʺsupporting safe handling, trade and disposal of
chemicalsʺ? Which external factors contributed to these changes?
5 Interviews and (v) p.
31
Explanation
Explanation
According to different progress reports and interviews, the willingness among the different countries to work on transboundary environmental issues and
their collaboration have improved significantly. Data and information on several environmental sectors were collected and shared. Joint actions ‐ especially
for the Drin river basin ‐ were planned, and cross border dialogs were inititated.
Explanation
The ENVSEC initiative led to concrete investment in remediation and cleanup activities in different mining sites, e.g., for rehabilitation of tailing dams and
acid mine drainage, which significantly reduced local and regional environmental and human health risks. Unfortunately, funds for concrete investment are
very limited. Between 2003 and 2013, only a total of 10 million US dollars were spent for 32 different projects.
Ten Aarhus Centres were operational, thanks to ENVSEC support that contributed to increased public awareness of local environmental problems and which
has also raised awareness among citizens of the rights provided to them through the Aarhus Convention. The Aarhus Centres have been actively promoting
environmental activism in the region. They work closely with the local administrations and facilitate cooperation with the communities. In those countries
where no Aarhus Centres could be established, like in Kosovo and Macedonia, there were no activities reported that enhanced the environmental awareness
of the population.
Page 12
Dostları ilə paylaş: |